DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimers filed on 04/29/2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of U.S. 11,552,692 and U.S. 12,119,915 have been reviewed and are accepted. The terminal disclaimers have been recorded.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/29/2026 arguing against the 35 U.S.C. § 102 and 35 U.S.C § 103 art rejections using the XRAN document have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. It is noted that although the independent claims have been amended (on 04/29/2026), the XRAN document is relied upon to reject the amended claims.
On page 8, Applicant argues “However, xRAN discloses only that the beam identifier indicates a single set of beamforming weights, rather than a plurality of sets of beamforming weights. See id. at Section 5.4.4.1, 5.4.5.5, and 5.4.5.9. Because xRAN does not disclose the idea of indicating a plurality of sets of beamforming weights, xRAN also does not disclose or suggest the idea of providing a corresponding set of beamforming weights for each position defined in an reMask. Notably, in xRAN, a single set of beamforming weights corresponding to the beamld applies to all REs indicated by the reMask. See id. at Section 5.4.5.9. Accordingly, xRAN cannot and does not disclose or suggest the idea of generating a C-plane message wherein the C-plane message provides, for each position defined in the reMask, a corresponding set of beamforming weights from a plurality of sets of beamforming weights, as required by the language of amended claim 1.”
Examiner response: Due the amendment to the independent claims, the grounds of rejection of the claims has been somewhat changed. The XRAN document discloses sets of beamforming weights (bfwI and bfwQ) in the section field of the Type “1” field (page 17), sections 5.4.5.8 wf (weight flag), refer to the weight flag description “wf=1…both beamforming index and weights…” and 5.4.5.9 beamId, and Table 8 on pages 20-21 (the beamforming information included for wf =1). Table 8 discloses the claimed multiple sets of beamforming weights: bfwI&bfwQ (for TRX0)…bfwI&bfwQ (for TRX L). Also refer to Tables 1 and 2, the digital beamforming required information and signaling granularity.”
Regarding the claimed “wherein the DACI message provides, for each position defined in the RE mask, a corresponding set of beamforming weights from the plurality of sets of beamforming weights”, the XRAN document discloses the above limitation. For example, refer to Fig. 2, the Type 1 field descriptions on at least page 17 and Table 8 “Scheduling and beamforming commands frame format (Section Type “1”))” (C-plane message per section 5.3.1 & Fig. 11 disclose “DACI” data-associated control information, and section 5.4.2). Table 8 discloses a format for the “DACI” and includes fields indicating bfwI&bfwQ (for TRX0…TRXL) applied to the used REs defined by the RE mask.
The current claim language does not exclude a same set of weights (bfwI&bfwQ for a TRXx) out of all the sets of weights (bfwIs&bfwQs for all the TRXxs) to be applied to all REs defined by the RE mask. In fact, dependent claim 5 claims “wherein the indication of a set of beamforming weights applies to each RE at a location in a PRB corresponding to a position defined in the RE mask”.
For at least the above reasons, the XRAN reference is relied upon to reject the instant claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
4. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
5. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
6. Claims 1-2, 5-7, 9-10,12-14, 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by xRAN, XRAN FFH.CUS.0-v01.00, Technical Specification, xRAN Fronthaul Working Group, Control, User and Synchronization Plane Specification, April 4, 2018 (this reference is cited in the 10/14/2024 IDS and a copy was submitted in case 17/298084 (instant application 18/914708 is a continuation of 17/298084)).
With respect to claim 1, the XRAN document discloses:
generating a data-associated control information (DACI) message including a section description associated with a plurality of signals (page 8, refer to Figures 1 and 2, and refer to Fig. 11, the generated DACI message, page 14, lines 27-29, page 17, lines 11-24, refer to lines 21-22, section type for section type “1” corresponds to the claimed section description, also page 16 section 5.4.2, lines 1-4) to be transmitted to, or received from, a user equipment (UE) over a wireless radio interface (signals are at least transmitted to a UE (in the downlink direction) from the RU of the eNB/gnB), also refer to at least Table 1 on page 10, wireless radio interface between the eNB/gnB and the UE and refer to Table 6 on page 15 Section Type “1”, “…DL/UL radio channels” and text above the table, also Table 3 on page 11, entries 1a, 1b, 2 and section 5.3.1 on page 14 “…control information required for processing user data (e.g. scheduling and beamforming commands).”),
the DACI message including:
a resource element mask that defines the location of one or more resource elements (REs) within a physical resource block (PRB) of a physical channel of the wireless radio interface (page 17, refer to reMask (line 31) and section 5.4.5.5 reMask defines the location of one or more REs within a PRB (Physical Resource Block) e.g. the default value where all REs are active, a PRB “is the baseline unit of allocation for the physical channels defined in LTE” as known in the art),
and an indication of a plurality of sets of beamforming weights to be applied by a radio unit (RU) when transmitting the plurality of signals to or receiving the plurality of signals from the UE (Refer to Table 1 (or Table 2) page 10, Digital beamforming requirements and the Signaling Granularity (Per RE per beam (corresponds to number of TRXs) per slot and used in the DL direction (to transmit the plurality of signals) or used in the UL direction (to receive the plurality of signals)). Table 8, discloses one set of beamforming weights: bfwI (for TRX0) bfwQ (for TRX0) and for the L TRXs refer to the remaining beamforming weights (an additional set or additional sets of bfwI and bfwQ, depending on the value of L) page 6, lines 32-34. The entries in the octets correspond to the claimed indication), wherein the DACI message provides, for each position defined in the RE mask (per Tables 1 or 2 signaling granularity “per RE”), a corresponding set of beamforming weights (“per RE” per TRX0, the set of bfWI and BfWQ) from the plurality of sets of beamforming weights (the plurality of sets (bfWI and bfWQ) for the 0…L TRXs);
transmitting the DACI message to the RU (as shown in at least Fig. 11, Table 3 and at least sections 5.3.1, 5.4.1 and 5.4.2).
With respect to claim 2, the xRAN document discloses wherein: the plurality of downlink signals are assigned to a plurality of PRBs in a section associated with the section description (within section field refer to assignment of PRBs based on parameters startXrbc and numXrbc, page 31, lines 1-19) ; and the RE mask defines positions of REs for all PRBs in the section (according to numXebc which defines the XRBs where the control section is valid (control section includes reMask, page 14, lines 27-29)).
With respect to claim 5, the xRAN document discloses: wherein the indication of a set of beamforming weights applies to each RE at a location in a PRB corresponding to a position defined in the RE mask (Table 1, at least digital beamforming information signaled per RE per beam as related to a set of beamforming weights, bfWI, bfwQ (Fig. 14)).
With respect to claim 6, the xRAN document discloses: wherein the indication of the plurality of sets of beamforming weights comprises the plurality of sets of beamforming weights (beamforming weights for Q and I, bfwQ, bfwI in Table 8 per TRX).
With respect to claim 7, the xRAN document discloses: wherein the indication of the plurality of sets of beamforming weights comprises a plurality of beam indices, each of the beam indices corresponding to one of the plurality of sets of beamforming weights (page 10, digital beamforming information per RE per beam per slot and Table 8 bfwQ and bfwI (each 16 bits) correspond to beam indices that correspond to one of the sets of beamforming weights (IQ weight set)).
With respect to claim 9, the xRAN document discloses: wherein the indication of the plurality of sets of beamforming weights is carried in a section extension of the section description (page 17, indication of the plurality of sets of beamforming weights including the sets of bfwI and bfwQ correspond to a section extension of section description (section type) included in the common header fields).
With respect to claim 10, the xRAN document discloses: wherein the section description comprises a plurality of section extensions, wherein each section extension of the plurality of section extensions identifies one of the plurality of sets of beamforming weights (as applied to at least Table 1 for digital beamforming, plurality of section extensions per RE per beam per slot and according to the ReMask. Also refer to Table 8 refer to bfwI and bfwQ and the remaining beamforming weights BfwI and BfwQ up to L TRXs)).
Claim 12 is rejected based on the rationale used to reject claim 1 above from the point of view of the RU of the XRAN document (the RU receives the DACI message from the LLS-CU and performs beamforming of signals transmitted to the UE using the plurality of sets of beamforming weights or performs beamforming of signals received from the UE) and refer to all the portions of the xRAN document cited in the rejection of claim 1).
With respect to claim 13, the xRAN document discloses: wherein the indication of the plurality of sets of beamforming weights comprises an indication of which of the plurality of sets of beamforming weights is to be applied to each of the plurality of REs used to transmit or receive the plurality of signals (refer to page 10, Tables 1 and 2 digital beamforming information per RE per beam per slot (for DL and UL) and Table 8 for example refer to bfwI and bfwQ (for TRX 0) and the remaining beamforming weights bfwI and BfwQ (up to L TRXs). Additionally refer to sections 5.4.5.8 and 5.4.5.9).
Claims 14, 16-17 are rejected based on the rationale used to reject claims 6, 9-10 above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
7. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
8. Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over xRAN, XRAN FFH.CUS.0-v01.00, Technical Specification, xRAN Fronthaul Working Group, Control, User and Synchronization Plane Specification, April 4, 2018 in view of Seo (U.S. 11,109,383)(this reference is cited in the 10/14/2024 IDS).
With respect to claim 3, the xRAN document discloses: providing an indication of
a set of beamforming weights for each position defined in the RE mask (for example a set of beamforming weights bfwI, bfwQ for each position defined in the RE mask (which indicates which REs are used)).
The xRAN document does not expressly disclose: unique.
In the field of wireless signal communication using REs, Seo discloses: unique (beam used for each RE belonging to the same RB, column 13, lines 56-59).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the xRAN document based on the teachings of Seo to provide an indication of a unique set of beamforming weights (bfwI, bfwQ ) for each active RE to obtain a spatial diversity gain in an XRB (PRB in LTE) in which the active REs belong (Seo , column 13, lines 56-59).
With respect to claim 4, the xRAN document discloses: providing an indication of a set of beamforming weights for each RE in the section at a location in a PRB corresponding to a position defined in the RE mask (according to the set of beamforming weights bfwI, bfwQ each position defined in the RE mask (which indicates which REs are used) which are in the section (section field) which includes reMask, bfwI, bfwQ)
The xRAN document does not expressly disclose: unique.
In the field of wireless signal communication using REs, Seo discloses: unique (beam used for each RE belonging to the same RB, column 13, lines 56-59).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the xRAN document based on the teachings of Seo to provide an indication of a unique set of beamforming weights (bfwI, bfwQ for each active RE to obtain a spatial diversity gain in an XRB (PRB) in which the active REs belong (Seo , column 13, lines 56-59).
9. Claims 11, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over xRAN, XRAN FFH.CUS.0-v01.00, Technical Specification, xRAN Fronthaul Working Group, Control, User and Synchronization Plane Specification, April 4, 2018 in view of Wu et al. (U.S. 2020/0195312)(this reference is cited in the 10/14/2024 IDS).
With respect to claim 11, the XRAN document discloses: wherein the indication of the plurality of sets of beamforming weights comprises a first set of complete beamforming weights and at least one set of beamforming weights (Table 1, beamforming information per RE and bfwI, bfwQ and Table 8, e.g. complete set of beamforming weights used for bfwI and bfwQ for TRX0).
The xRAN document does not disclose: a delta-coded, that are delta-coded with respect to the first set of complete beamforming weights.
In the field of signaling weights, Wu et al. disclose: delta-coded, delta-coded with respect to a first complete (index of a) beamforming weight ([0168] refer to the disclosed delta-coded (differential) index (pointing to a precoding or beamforming weight of a codebook) is delta-coded (differential that is “a relationship between it and a given precoding vector is indicated”) with respect to first precoding vector (index) which is completely indicated. Also refer to [0060]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the xRAN document based on the teachings of Wu et al., and use delta-coding (differential method coding) to indicate at least one of set of beamforming weights (set of beamforming weights for bfwI and bfwQ for TRX1 or the 0…L TRXs) using a differential method with respect to the completely indicated set of beamforming weights (of TRX0) to reduce signaling overhead in the indication of the sets of beamforming weights of the REs ([0168] of Wu et al.).
Claim 18 is rejected based on the rationale used to reject claim 11 above.
10. Claims 8, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over xRAN, XRAN FFH.CUS.0-v01.00, Technical Specification, xRAN Fronthaul Working Group, Control, User and Synchronization Plane Specification, April 4, 2018 in view of Tran et al. (U.S. 10,461,421).
With respect to claim 8, the xRAN document discloses: wherein the indication of the plurality of sets of beamforming weights comprises a plurality (of sets of weights the sets of bfwI and bfwQ per RE per TRX0…L).
The xRAN document does not expressly disclose: a plurality of sets of beamforming attributes that describe respective antenna beams.
Implementing beamforming, Tran discloses: beamforming attributes that describe respective antenna beams (column 46, lines 40-48 refer to the adjustment of antenna beam characteristics (attributes) through digital beamforming) and column 44, lines 17-23 disclosing the use of a complex weight by the digital beamformer).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the indication of the plurality of sets of beamforming weights (bfwI, bfwQ) of the xRAN document comprises a plurality of sets of beamforming attributes (beam characteristics as taught by Tran) that describe respective antenna beams, e.g. “nulls in the antenna beam pattern and… beam shaping and other beam characteristics are dynamically modified through the use of …digital beam forming” (Tran column 44, lines 17-23, column 46, lines 44-48).
Claim 15 is rejected based on the rationale used to reject claim 8 above.
Conclusion
11. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Choi et al. (U.S. 2011/0007695) refer to at least [0031] which discloses: “FIG. 2B shows an example resource block for use with various embodiments. Physical resource block 220 is the baseline unit of allocation for the physical channels defined in LTE…”.
12. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Contact Information
13. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SOPHIA VLAHOS whose telephone number is (571)272-5507. The examiner can normally be reached M 8:00-4:00, TWRF 8:00-2:00.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, SAM K AHN can be reached at 571-272-3044. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
SOPHIA VLAHOS
Examiner
Art Unit 2633
/SOPHIA VLAHOS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2633 05/21/2029
Prosecution Insights